Even under “normal” political times; the fight for a SCOTUS Justice is often a brutal one.

But as the saying goes…these are not normal times.

Justice Kennedy is retiring; two of the “liberal” judges are in their 80’s; and we have a POTUS hell bent on feeding the masses that will satiate his enormous ego.

Most importantly; the nomination puts one issue; and one issue only, into focus…abortion.

Personally I am not nearly as “fired-up” about this issue (a SCOTUS Justice nomination; NOT abortion, which I don’t discuss) as many of my friends and colleagues on the Right and Left are…because often the Justices “surprise” the Tribalist because they either 1) stick to the Law 2) make narrow decisions that are case-specific and/or 3) make decisions that are about preserving the Rights of U.S. citizens despite the screams of the Tribe.

Mostly.

Let’s hope that those who truly research the nominee’s provide Trump with solid legal scholars who understand the Law and are not merely mouthpieces of their Tribe.

Since he was a candidate, Trump has had in his possession a list of nominees selected for him by The Federalist Society. He seems certain to stick to his promise to pick nominees off of that list. Needless to say, they are all very, very conservative, and are widely considered a lock to vote to overturn RvW and other civil-rights rulings.

I’m not very well versed on this stuff, but how likely is a vote on those critical rulings? When you mention civil-rights, surely you’re not alluding that the civil rights act would be overturned.

I was a fan of Kennedy in the sense that he was not as one-sided and seemed to evaluate issues on a case-by-case basis. Again I’m no legal expert and loosely follow the supreme court and legal issues, but I’m not sure if that’s possible in today’s political climate. I find it ridiculous that there are certain judges (on both sides) where you pretty much know how they will vote regardless of the arguments made or the specifics of the case.

No, I was referring to more recent civil-rights decisions; eg, gay rights.

My misunderstanding then. That decision was made only a few years ago, it would really be overturned so quickly? I think gay rights (or at least marriage) has a comfortable majority support from polls I’ve seen and I was hoping it was becoming a non-issue.

They are going to have indulge in some serious hypocrisy if the SCOTUS starts to change rulings and strengthen its power and reach in American lives as the whole state rights vs the fed government issue will inevitably heat up. And conservatives are all about states’ rights except when they aren’t.

We’ll see what happens when the majority of states don’t fall in line with so-called conservative beliefs. When it comes to abortion and gay marriage, in the nation as a whole the view is trending in favor of them.

That decision was made only a few years ago, it would really be overturned so quickly?

After a radical reconstitution of the court? Sure. In fact, the recency of the decision might make it more vulnerable (because it hadn’t had time to become firmly rooted as precedent).

Drew1411:

I think gay rights (or at least marriage) has a comfortable majority support from polls I’ve seen and I was hoping it was becoming a non-issue.

I agree that it enjoys vastly more support than it used to. And it’s not always clear how the court of public opinion influences the court of the Supremes. But if Trump puts another originalist/textualist on the bench, who knows. They may rule that the previous decision overstepped the proper limits of the judiciary, arguing that gay-rights protections have to be explicitly established by the legislative branch.